Tue 18-Oct-11 11:12 AM | edited Tue 18-Oct-11 04:59 PM by nathantw1
I already have a D700 with great ISO capability so I would like a camera with more megapixels. Plus at $7000 (est.) the Canon camera would be a hefty investment away from Nikon since I'd need to buy all new lenses too.
Plus, both Nikon and Canon have had DSLRs called "D60" at one point or another.
And now D1x...1Dx.
As Thom says in his latest update, this camera has a lot of Nikon "DNA" in it. Canonrumors actually posted a pic of a Nikon D3 viewfinder, supposedly from the Canon 1Dx! But it turned out it wasn't from the Canon at all!
I agree. I actually prefer Canon ergonomics, but it was just more practical overall for me to use the same brand as my wife, who prefers Nikon. I've made a significant (for me at least) investment recently in a pre-owned Nikon 24-70mm and 105mm VR that pretty much financially locks me into Nikon.
The Canon 1D X strikes me as a camera designed to cover the Olympics. I bet Nikon will have a similarly spec'ed camera (high FPS, fast autofocus, high ISO, not-so-high pixels) in time for the Olympics too.
>The Canon 1D X strikes me as a camera designed to cover the >Olympics. I bet Nikon will have a similarly spec'ed camera >(high FPS, fast autofocus, high ISO, not-so-high pixels) in >time for the Olympics too.
Absolutely true. It appears to be designed for the 2012 Olympics, with the ethernet jack and all. Nikon and Canon have historically often released top-line SLRs before the Olympics.
I wish I don't have to buy - and carry - TWO next generation Nikons - I better pay more for one universal, up to 10 K$. But it should NOT be worse than any current Nikon or competitor. So, 24 MP - 12 FPS - 50K ISO. Any figure may be higher, but not lower.